Great pitched battle

An Analysis of the Buddhist Scholarly Contribution towards the Success of Panadura Vadaya in 1873

Although the Kandy convention of 1815 said that, in its very words, ‘The religion of Boodhoo professed by the chiefs and inhabitants of these provinces is declared inviolable and its rites, ministers and the places of worship are to be maintained and protected’, with the march of time, became a dead letter. In other words, Buddhism in ‘then current Ceylon’ was in great danger. The patronage, reverence and sponsorship which had been bestowed upon the Buddhist dispensation by the ancient Ceylonese kingship, was no longer existent under the British imperialism. Christianity was given the place of Buddhism to the utter regret of the Sinhalese Buddhists who were the clean majority.

In this background a legendary debate took place in 1873, commonly known as Panadura Vadaya. As Stephen Skuce puts it ‘The controversy at Panadura or Pandura Vadaya, which had its beginnings in 1873, may be considered a cornerstone of the modern society in which we live today.

It is not a symbol of fanaticism but a land-mark in the social transition which this island has undergone’. According to the available literature, the immediate reasons for the aforesaid debate in Panadura in 1873 were the publications by Rev. Daniel Gogerly and a series of sermons preached by Rev. David de Silva insulting and criticising Buddhism in public in Panadura Methodist church. Having heard this, Ven. Migettuwatte Gunananda thera, being an eminent spokesman for Buddhism, took exception to those sermons and bravely challenged Rev. Silva to defend his remarks by means of an open debate.

Well attended debate

As agreed by both Buddhist and Christian parties, this Panadura Vadaya held on 26th and 28th August in 1873 in a bungalow located at Dombagahawatta in Panadura. Ven. Migettuwatte Gunananda was the chief orator from Buddhist fraction and about 200 Buddhist monks are said to have graced the occasion along with several erudite Buddhist monks who were famous as Buddhist scholars both locally and internationally. Representing the Christian fraction, Rev. David de Silva, a Ceylonese Methodist minister and Rev. F S Sirimanne, an Anglican lay evangelist partook the event along with a number of Christians.

As expected by the many, this debate proceeded further without any palpable disturbances with a participation of a crowd of over 7000 in number. This debate was originally reported by a learned Christian gentleman called Mr Edward Perera by the request of John Capper, the editor of the Ceylon Times and later on, it was compiled into one booklet by J M Peebles, a traveller and a famous scholar from America, and it was distributed in Europe.

Having had the opportunity to read that text of Panadura Vadaya, Colonel Henry Olcott came to Sri Lanka in 1880 and embraced Buddhism. His arrival to Ceylon fuelled and ignited the Buddhist revival in the country and he initiated a number of progressive movements in pursuit of the guard, ward and protection of Buddhist dispensation.

The main purpose of this paper is not merely to present a detailed account of Panadura Vadaya with its general information, but to discuss several unanswered questions, in other words some ‘points of possible controversy’, giving a special attention to the Buddhist scholarly contribution towards the success of Panadura Vadaya.

It is common knowledge that debating is not an easy thing to exercise, for people who are not of a sound knowledge about the subject that they wish to debate upon. On the other hand, one should have a fairly sound knowledge about the background of one’s opposition and their strengths and weaknesses as well, especially when it comes debating. As mentioned before, the most valuable human resource for the Buddhist fraction to Panadura Vadaya was Ven. Gunananda Thera. He was acclaimed as a debater of a very high order after this debate and his personality deeply affected the resurgence of Buddhism which was to follow. He was described as "the boldest, most brilliant and most powerful champion of Sinhalese Buddhism" and the leader of the Buddhist revival.

Ven. Gunananda Thera

Although he was the golden voice of the debate, it was not a feat played alone.

There was a squadron of erudite Buddhist scholars who continuously supported him behind the screen giving a great deal of confidence and encouragement by means of academic knowledge and other necessary counselling, throughout the debate.

Some of them were namely most Ven. Hikkaduwa Sri Sumangala, Ven. Weligama Sumangala, Ven. Walana Sri Siddhartha, Ven. Battaramulla Sri Subhathi, Ven. Dodanduwa Piyarathana and Ven. Rathmalane Dhammalaka etc.3. Not only that, all the other four famous debates which were held before Panadura Vadaya, namely Varagoda Vadaya (1865), Baddagama Vadaya (1865), Udamvita Vadaya (1866) and Gampola Vadaya (1871) were participated by the Buddhist debaters under the supervision and guidance of the above mentioned learned Buddhist monks.

Buddhist Pali Canon is pregnant with a large number of texts that belongs to three baskets namely Sutta, Vinaya and Abhidhamma. When we look at the sources of subject material used by Ven. Gunananda to defend Buddhism from the verbal crusade came from the Christian camp against Buddhism, we observe that, most of the time, he had referred to the Abhidhamma Pitaka, the higher teaching of the Buddha, in comparison to other sources.

As the history records it, there were no appointed judges to give the final judgement of Panadura Vadaya. However, although he was not a Buddhist, the editor of Times of Ceylon newspaper, John Capper, had been very enthusiastic towards this debate. As a result of it he had requested an English learned lawyer called Edward Perera to record the whole debate in English as accurately as possible. Although a number of people had recorded the same from both parties, it is said that nobody’s recording had been as successful as the English translation of Mr Edward Perera as he did it genuinely and impartially in his level best.8 Later on Mr Capper published the entire debate in his newspaper enabling the general public to read and understand. Afterwards, having had the opportunity to read the same, it was compiled into one booklet by the famous traveller and scholar Dr J M Peebles. But as the both Buddhist and Christian parties were trying to claim victory over each other, no one was clear as to who they should call winners.

Impact on religious harmony

W J T Small, a historian of Sri Lankan Methodism, once had said ‘The results of the debate were, from the nature of the case, inconclusive’. In other words they didn’t like to admit the defeat straightaway. What he had tried to elaborate was, although it was acknowledged in the eyes of the many that Buddhists had defeated the Christians, by means of the debate, Christians had the opportunity to present clearly the gospel to many thousands of Buddhists.

In that same volume, Small goes on saying that ‘But the net result was very small, except that relations were more strained than ever.

The Christian Church continued to grow, but not as a result of the controversy.’ Through making the above statements what he meant was that this debating encounter did not lead to any harmonious relationship between the two religions but it made the situation worse.

Again Moscrop and Restarick, in their book Ceylon and its Methodism make a remark on Panadura Vadayaas it was a “Great pitched battle”. In the same volume they goes on saying about Panadura, the town where the controversy took place thus; ‘an intensely Buddhist centre, where opposition has often become persecution, where controversy has often been bitter’. By that statement they had tried to convince the society that the setting of the great debate was far more favourable to the Buddhist fraction, which didn’t make any sense at all at that time in the minds of the many.

Apart from this, except few other books, the Ceylonese Christian literature had not worried too much to write on Panadura Vadaya any longer.

Since it was a decisive verbal battle fought to safeguard the Buddhism from its rivals, it is needless to say that Ven. Migettuwatte used the sharpest, most reliable and well-founded basket of the Tripitaka, the Abhidhamma, along with other sources in that feat. However the Buddha had not ever preached that Buddhism or His Dhamma is meant for debating. But the encounter that we witnessed in Panadura Vadaya exhibits that, if challenged, Buddhism can face any other theistic religion with ease.

The main reason behind the success of the Buddhism is, there is an inherent nature of Buddha’s doctrine that the more it is revealed, become open, the more it shines forth and become luminous unlike some other prevailing faiths. The problem of the final judgement of Panadura Vadaya does not arise any longer, as it was, with all due respect, given by an erudite Christian scholar himself. So should we worry on that anymore? Certainly not.

Apart from few references made briefly, we do not find any comprehensive and a detailed account of information from the Ceylonese Christian literature on Panadura Vadaya.

 

All in all, we have all the luxury to claim that it was not another sheer clash between two religious groups roused by narrow political interferences as we experience today, but a formal and philosophical debate which was highly instrumental for the remarkable revival of Buddhism in ancient Ceylon in the late ninetieth century.